Interestingly, I'm somewhat afraid that this isn't formulated constructively enough. It's really hard to write this without sounding like I'm attacking you. But I guess that's what discussions are.
The legal profession exists because rules/laws are subject to all sorts of interpretation. And just as is the case in the outside world, it seems that, if at all, the rules are cited quite frequently for no other reason than someone decided that they didn't/don't agree with something that someone said.
Hell, I've been downvoted a number of times for relaying facts that answer questions people here are asking or for pointing out a duplicate post. As you can imagine, such experiences detract from the experience, but perhaps that is the point?